At a time when the world is concerned about global warming, when the government is pushing energy conservation and reduced carbon emissions, media reports showed that Government Information Office (GIO) Minister Philip Yang (楊永明) racked up an electricity bill of more than NT$20,000 at his 130m2 residence for July/August. This is many times more than an average family would use. It seems that the man in charge of announcing the government’s policy on the environment is setting a rather bad example.
In his defense, Yang said he had a young child at home and needed to have the air conditioning on all day. He then criticized the press for writing that he was “harming Taiwan” by wasting electricity. The GIO followed this by bringing out records of previous agency heads, pointing out that GIO chiefs when the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was in power also had high electricity bills.
The press dug deeper. Some media reports said that the July/August bill the year before last for the residence of Greater Kaohsiung Mayor Chen Chu (陳菊) was as much as NT$120,000. And if you think that was high, how about the bills run up by former premier Liu Chao-shiuan’s (劉兆玄) residence, which topped NT$300,000. Of course, one must remember that these bills included electricity used by their respective retinues.
These astronomical bills have roused the ire of the public. It takes some gall to bang on in public about the importance of conserving energy only to waste it in private. Worse still, these officials are not even paying for it: The taxpayer is.
That’s not to say that the individuals singled out here are the worst offenders. By the same token, just because someone has not been named does not mean they are not just as wasteful; it simply means that their records have not been made public. However, putting aside the actual figures for a minute and how they compare with the average bill of NT$3,000 paid by ordinary households, the most striking thing about this is how widespread the phenomenon seems to be.
Even though the story of the astronomical bills has just broken and senior officials have been found to be saying one thing and doing another, some good has already come of it. The universal public condemnation has obliged Yang to apologize and to look into the cause of these excessive bills. Apparently it was because of old equipment in the building, something which has now been addressed.
Yang missed an opportunity here. He should have apologized to the public and investigated the problem instead of dragging others into the fray. It would have been perfect if he had used his own experience to promote policy. He could have reminded the public of the importance of checking their electrical equipment and not being lured into the false economy of not buying the latest model. Old equipment laps up electricity at an astonishing rate, which makes it important to upgrade. He could have turned the situation around for himself quite easily and better promoted energy conservation.
These electricity bills have also caught the attention of the Control Yuan, which has decided to launch a comprehensive review. Senior officials with energy-inefficient households and officials or public institutions who fritter away taxpayers’ money may well find themselves on the wrong side of the Control Yuan’s attention.
However, it would be even better if the government set a standard for amenities usage levels, and required any officials or institutions that exceed these standards to foot the bill themselves. Why should the taxpayer have to bear the brunt of official excesses and abuses?
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS